Strict Liability [6]

Question 1

Gammon Factors [6]

Answer 1

1. Gammon hong kong v attorney general - builders did not follow the exact plan and the building collapsed
2. first gammon factor:is the offence regulatory in nature or is it a true crime? the judges will read th statute and gauge if the description of a crime is not truly criminal . in the case of sweet v parsley - D conviction for drug offences was quashed because the offence was considered a ‘true crime’ requiring men’s rea
3. second factorv: is it a issue of social concern, if it does strict liability is more likely to be imposed to protect the public - harrow london borough council v shah (D were convicted of selling a national lottery to a 16 year old, cundi v le coq (selling alcohol to someone who is already intoxicated)
4. third: wording of the statuteif there are words pointing to a MR then it is more likely yo be a true crime - alphacell v woodward ( D charged with causing poluting material to enter a river
5. fourth: gravity of punishment the more serious the punishment for the offence the less likely it is to be one of strict liability - callow v tillstone butcher was exposed for selling unfit meat even though he had taken reasonable care by having a vet inspect the carcass